Pat Toomey

There is legislation that I think would be very constructive to that end. It was introduced in the House by Congressman Mulvaney, and what it would do is streamline some of the regulations affecting business development companies.

You're going to see how this campaign plays out before he can determine whether to support Donald Trump.

Taxpayers are on the hook today because of Dodd-Frank.

Do you think a $50 billion bank in America is systemically important to our $17 trillion economy?

The notion that repealing Title II puts taxpayers on the hook for a bailout is just amazing to me.

We did not have an adequate resolution mechanism for the failure of a very large, complex financial institution.

I get that, but just so that I understand, is it the policy of the Administration to pay Iran for the heavy water?

Has Secretary Kerry been visiting European banks and encouraging them to do business with Iran?

I thought this was a terrible deal at the time. I thought then it was a bad idea to turn over $100 billion to the world's leading State sponsor of terrorism.

It has been characterized by some European banks as him actively encouraging them to do business with Iran despite the outrageous behavior.

Despite all of this bad behavior post-JCPOA conclusion, it seems to me the Administration is, nevertheless, conferring more benefits upon the Iranians than the JCPOA even requires.

It appears implicitly to be virtually condoning the behavior.

In fact, doesn't the Administration argue that this is not a legally binding agreement with respect to Iran but, rather, a set of political commitments?

I would note Iran is in flagrant violation of 2231, which is the implementation resolution of the JCPOA.

This notion that somehow there is... moderates who we should economically seduce.

I share the view of Senator Menendez that in response to these really outrageous and aggressive behaviors, we have every right--in fact, responsibility, really, to impose the kind of sanctions that might dissuade these behaviors.

I remain strongly opposed to this deal that turns over something on the order of $100 billion to the world's leading State sponsor of terrorism.

The JCPOA does not preclude non-nuclear sanctions

Sanctions against Iran's many malign activities are not JCPOA violations, as Iran claims, but, rather, an affirmation of U.S. policy.

The Administration has designated no individuals or entities for human rights abuses since the nuclear deal was reached.

Congress should reject this nuclear blackmail and hold the Administration accountable for its commitments.

That is what it looks like to me, and that strikes me as a bad idea.

The U.S. Government and U.S. Congress is not going to be shy about using all instruments, of course, of powering, including sanctions, to stop that activity

Thank you for this opportunity to present our views, and we would be pleased to respond to any questions that Members of the Committee may have.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.